Plus they're not really in the social networking business, and I bet Facebook in a few years could look a lot like AOL after Time Warner got stuck with it. Facebook will become old hat and less fashionable than it is now, and when it's not cool it's powers will fade.

FB has an enormous amount of potential but nobody has really figured out how to tap those reserves... and I certainly don't have the answer.

... Apart from the struggle over Flash I don't see why they would want to or need to get stuck in that tarbaby unless to make my life easier out of charity.

While not originally anything to do with racism, the word "tarbaby" has a lot of bad racial overtones in large parts of the USA. Just sayin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banalltv

... It would be easier to build their own stuff that covers a lot of the Adobe bases with it - like a more fully-feaured iWeb or something, or add stuff to Aperture that you can draw with - and give it to us cheap. That would help squeeze Adobe in the Flash wars but it's more direct to fight Flash by making deals and encouraging HTML5 adoption..
...

The problem I have is that if we are honest (and I know I will get pilloried for even saying this out loud), Apple is really not that good at application software. They've had some hits but they've had a lot of misses as well. Apple makes excellent OS level software, but once you get into the apps, they are not really that good.

Apple would do better to get companies interested in making application software for the Mac that works well and is better suited to the Mac than buying Adobe and trying to do it all themselves. They already make all the iLife software themselves, and all the iWork software as well. If they made all the pro level creative software, there wouldn't be a reason for anyone to make software for them at all.

FB has an enormous amount of potential but nobody has really figured out how to tap those reserves... and I certainly don't have the answer.

A few big companies have limped in but nobody has placed a value bet.

It's back to iTunes if there is any truth. I can't see any other use except for an expanded iTunes market and as i already said a decent interface for FB with Apple at the helm. It's a stretch though. More likely Steve is trying to get some mutually beneficial agreement. But these are strange times ...

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

How about buying Apple someof its own stock....especially on a pullback? Sales grew at the rate of 70% and PE is around 16. Other than that, Apple is better off just buying key technologies like speciality software like the multi touch it bough a few years ago, or the chip tech used in A4. These small purchases are less of a gamble, do not pollute the balance sheet, etc.

A company like Facebook would add too much good will and intangible to its balance sheet. There is no synergy with Apple. Anyway, if Apple wants a website like Facebook, why not build its own and a better one? Sounds ridiculous paying $Bs for something that has minimal assets, and questionable economics.

Too much money gives anybody hubris. Apple has avoided that... just hope it does not change.

Remember Steve's feelings when he closed the printer and camera divisions at Apple when he returned a iCEO. Why make something many others make and most better? Steve only does magic remember nothing mundane

yes but apple can take the "mundane" and make it "magical." Remember, they weren't the first mp3 player, or first smartphone, or first tablet computer. They cut the cameras and printers because they were just like the rest. If Apple makes a TV, it will only be because they feel its better than all other TVs on the market.

Facebook would seem to be a strange buy to me. Social network users are incredibly flickle, and I think Facebook is a short term thing. MySpace seemed worth paying a lot of money for to News International a couple of years ago, then everyone moved to Facebook and it seemed like a lousy buy.

I could see the same happening to Facebook.

Facebook may be the next MySpace, but even if that's true, it's an exaggeration to think that it "only has a couple of years." For starters, MySpace hasn't been cool for at least ten years, but it's still hanging around and still has tons of users.

Secondly, MySpace exploded when the average Schmo discovered the Internet and road the wave of consumer desktop expansion. Facebook started on the desktop but is basically riding the new mobile platform expansion. It will be at least ten years before anything comes along to even challenge it, possibly a lot longer.

How about buying Apple someof its own stock....especially on a pullback?.

This is what people don't understand - Apple is already serving its shareholders VERY well as measured by stock price. They don't need to artificially boost stock price by repurchasing shares. Shares outstanding is already under a billion - look at MSFT - they have WAYYYY more shares outstanding. Apple's is low enough as it is.

As long as the price keeps rising, there's not gonna be any legitimate pressure to repurchase or pay a dividend. Not that apple would listen, anyway, lol.

yes but apple can take the "mundane" and make it "magical." Remember, they weren't the first mp3 player, or first smartphone, or first tablet computer. They cut the cameras and printers because they were just like the rest. If Apple makes a TV, it will only be because they feel its better than all other TVs on the market.

Which was what my first sentence said (that you didn't quote). "I wondered about this too. However, if Apple does TV then it will not be like any TV we have ever seen. That is for sure."

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

It always struck me as a brilliant metaphor for getting stuck worse and worse in something you should have just not gotten involved in in the first place.

And it should still be read that way still IMHO. Sometimes political correctness goes overboard. If tar happened to be green there would be no such issue. The fact is you are correct it is a brilliant metaphor and a great story.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Forget the craziness about buying them outright or the naive idea that Apple can build something to match and beat Facebook. Just invest a billion or two into them. At current estimated valuations, a $1B investment gives Apple 3-4% of the company. That's enough to keep them close, out of the hands of an enemy, make them cooperate in Apple's longer term social networking plans (whatever those might be.)

I doubt they'd buy Adobe. They'd have to pay too much ($14B) and get too little (stuff they could probably re-create themselves.) Though, arguably, this is a better option than buying Facebook.

Yes when you really think about it only Photoshop and perhaps Illustrator are required. Apple could develop their own for a lot less.

Acrobat is the cash cow at Adobe. Plus, Dreamweaver and inDesign are really good apps as well. Of course Flash would not be much of an asset considering the current bad press coming out of Cupertino.

Adobe also has Coldfusion/JRun, which although not very popular any longer, having been eclipsed by the much less expensive PHP, it is still a fully compliant JEE JSP server on the scale of IBM's Domino. They also have a site analytics application omniture which could be useful against Google.

Facebook would seem to be a strange buy to me. Social network users are incredibly flickle, and I think Facebook is a short term thing. MySpace seemed worth paying a lot of money for to News International a couple of years ago, then everyone moved to Facebook and it seemed like a lousy buy.

I could see the same happening to Facebook.

Apple doesn't need to buy any social site when they are fully capable of making their own . Besides, facebook and myspace have the same damn people per se. Both are nothing but hangouts and the users migrate all over the place.

After all the discussion months ago regarding Apple TV, maybe the eventual direction is to manufacture a TV with the new Apple TV built inside. Not saying tomorrow....down the road.

Good point...If I was a TV manufacturer I would go to Apple and propose my best, largest, thinnest screen and make them a TV with "Apple inside!" to be sold in the Apple stores only. (Then eventually, Best Buy, Target, Walmart, Radio Shack and 7-Eleven stores)

the new 3DTV is not selling well and the TV manufacturers are scrambling to find a "differentiator" to set them apart. If I was in tech I would do everything I could to hook up with the Apple train!

After all, it wasn't too long ago that Sony made a Trinitron Monitor (who thinks up these names?) for Apple with the Apple logo on it.

It always struck me as a brilliant metaphor for getting stuck worse and worse in something you should have just not gotten involved in in the first place.

The word you want is 'mired'.

It has an Irish connotation too - boggy ground - making it perfect.

Quote:

mire
noun
a stretch of swampy or boggy ground.
soft and slushy mud or dirt.
figurative a situation or state of difficulty, distress, or embarrassment from which it is hard to extricate oneself : he has been left to squirm in a mire of new allegations.
Ecology a wetland area or ecosystem based on peat.
verb [ trans. ] (usu. be mired)
cause to become stuck in mud

Acrobat is the cash cow at Adobe. Plus, Dreamweaver and inDesign are really good apps as well. Of course Flash would not be much of an asset considering the current bad press coming out of Cupertino.

Adobe also has Coldfusion/JRun, which although not very popular any longer, having been eclipsed by the much less expensive PHP, it is still a fully compliant JEE JSP server on the scale of IBM's Domino. They also have a site analytics application omniture which could be useful against Google.

And there is the huge Font folio that Adobe owns as well.

Ok, you convinced me ... Buy Adobe

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

I've put this question out there many times and never had a response (from someone who knows such stuff)...

But isn't it possible assuming Apple's worth say 300 Billion presently...that if the market should take a silly 6-18 month nose dive (not sure it would)...say to half it's value...then Apple's at 150B...then couldn't Steve/Apple potentially borrow 100B based on cash-flow levels and cash in hand and actually buy Apple back from the shareholders?

By 1987, Virgin Group PLC's sales had risen to more than $230 million; when combined with sales at Virgin Atlantic, Branson's companies were pulling in over $350 million annually. Interestingly, following the October 1987 stock market crash, Branson took the company private again in 1988 through a management buyout, restructured his companies, and sold 25 percent of his Virgin Music Group for $170 million.

What would Apple ever need in Facebook? I mean seriously? Facebook is just a big advertising engine with lots of privacy problem. It may generate cash, but then again, so does Apple products. Most Apple products integrate with Facebook already and Ping will likely come on shortly. Why spend billions on that?

Historically Apple buys small companies with large upside in multiples for the investment. Yes they are keeping their proverbial powder dry for a large acquisition but I still can't see what company they would really want to own. A potential large acquisition would primarily serve a market Apple has little penetration. And I'm sure the board of directors at Apple is talking about potential targets. But nothing makes sense to me unless Apple really changes who they are.

For example, they could own much of the business space by buying Dell. But Dell is riding a stable business with stagnant profits and no vision. Steve doesn't want the corporate market bad enough to deal with a company like that and its boring machines.

Adobe could be acquired but it would raise the ire of anti-trust regulators (not insurmountable) and Adobe doesn't have a lot of great upside, unless Steve loses his mind and starts loving Flash. Sure they generate a lot of cash, but so does Apple.

ARM? Qualcomm? If this happened, Apple would end up selling products to all their phone/tablet competitors. Awkward. Many of either of those companies' customers might look elsewhere.

Off topic but interesting: Mired is nice but it wasn't about just a word. The Uncle Remus Story by Joel Chandler Harris was an Aesop's type lesson where punching the tar baby was a really bad idea. Far more than a mere word. He may have based the term tar baby on (ironically) African folk lore which had a similar a creature.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Perfectly sensible name if you ask me. Most CRT tubes have an elecTRON gun. Sony came up with a CRT that used three instead of one. TRI means three so TRIniTRON makes perfect sense

Totally correct: "The name Trinitron was derived from trinity, meaning the union of three, and tron from electron tube, after the way that the Trinitron combined the three separate electron guns of other CRT designs into one."

My first ever TV (That I bought) was a 13" Trinitron in a wood cabinet with a dish type antenna. I loved it to bits even if I did have to sit really close

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"